Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 01:29:42 04/12/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 12, 1998 at 04:13:12, Mats Winther wrote: >On April 11, 1998 at 17:56:49, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>But I don't see your point... Let's say Fritz 5 plays these ugly moves >>you posted. I believe you. At times it can play horribly, like all >>programs. Like anyone here, I could post hundreds of this kind of moves. >>And it wouldn't prove anything different than: programs (all) play lousy >>moves every now and then. >> >Yes, and my point is that I want to promote good quality positional >chess. Fritz5 simply plays ridiculous moves more often than the others. >But the engine too has the capability to escape rotten positions >by tactical wizardy. I am aware of that. Nevertheless, I am against >the development of computerchess into positional dumbness (even if >they become tactical wizards). > >These are simply my political views. I was content when Hiarcs was >in the lead because then I saw a future of intelligent (not merely >strong) programs. But when Fritz5 is in the lead I see a future of >positionally dumb but strong programs that often plays awkwardly (but >nevertheless wins by tactical superiority). I couldn't agree more. This seems to have been the year of the fast searchers. They improved in strength more than the knowledgeable programs. Last year it was the other way around. Still, Fritz 5 and Nimzo 98 know quite a bit more than their predecessors. And yes, Fritz 5 is positionally weaker than the other top programs, but it's main improvement over Fritz 4 is in knowledge, not in speed. I am too much more interested in positional improvements. In my opinion, time (faster processors) is in their favor. We'll see what Rebel 10 and Hiarcs 7 can do. Enrique >Mats
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.